From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264444AbTLBXlD (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Dec 2003 18:41:03 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264446AbTLBXlD (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Dec 2003 18:41:03 -0500 Received: from mtaw4.prodigy.net ([64.164.98.52]:36252 "EHLO mtaw4.prodigy.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264444AbTLBXlA (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Dec 2003 18:41:00 -0500 Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 15:40:51 -0800 From: Mike Fedyk To: bill davidsen Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: libata in 2.4.24? Message-ID: <20031202234051.GE4154@mis-mike-wstn.matchmail.com> Mail-Followup-To: bill davidsen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <3FCB8312.3050703@rackable.com> <877k1f9e1g.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv> <20031202230216.GB4154@mis-mike-wstn.matchmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 11:18:24PM +0000, Bill Davidsen wrote: > In article <20031202230216.GB4154@mis-mike-wstn.matchmail.com>, > Mike Fedyk wrote: > | On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 10:34:20PM +0000, Bill Davidsen wrote: > | > after each O_SYNC write, so that's probably not practical. Clearly the > | > best solution is a full SCSI implementation over PATA/SATA, but that > | > would eliminate some of the justification for SCSI devices at premium > | > prices. > | > | In many ways, that is exactly what SATA is. :) > > Until multiple devices be string are available SATA will have logistical > problems scaling. The small cable is an advantage running a few drives > in a box, but a server with 40 drives or so would go from a cable bundle > out the back, about 5cm by 1 cm, to a real bunch of those little round > cables running everywhere. Certainly doable, but I think I'd name the > server "Medusa" if I built it. > Isn't this what SSCSI (Serial SCSI) will be doing also -- one drive one cable? I'd imagine that you'd have one connection to the enclosure, and the entire enclosure will look like a single drive. I've heard of SCSI enclosures like this (even ones that hold ide drives, but talk scsi to the host). > I believe SATA-2 will address this, if I may believe what's projected > for an unwritten standard. There will probably be many ways to get around any issues that may come up with SATA until SATA-2 comes out.